1
|
Brees J, Martinko MJ. Judgments of Responsibility Versus Accountability. JOURNAL OF LEADERSHIP & ORGANIZATIONAL STUDIES 2015. [DOI: 10.1177/1548051815603127] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
We proposed and found that employees’ judgments of responsibility and accountability are distinct but positively related constructs. Using attribution theory for responsibility judgments and lay dispositionalism for accountability judgments, we hypothesized that employees hold others more responsible (i.e., causal) and accountable (i.e., punishable) than they hold themselves for the same workplace mistakes. Independent mean differences within a sample of 286 working adults revealed that people held others more responsible but not more accountable than they held themselves. Post hoc analyses revealed a counterintuitive finding. Counter to what theory would predict, as workplace mistake seriousness increased the variation between self-judgement and other-judgment decreased. Implications and future directions for accountability research are discussed.
Collapse
|
2
|
Demirag I, Khadaroo I. Accountability and value for money: a theoretical framework for the relationship in public–private partnerships. JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT & GOVERNANCE 2009. [DOI: 10.1007/s10997-009-9109-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
|
3
|
Frink DD, Hall AT, Perryman AA, Ranft AL, Hochwarter WA, Ferris GR, Royle MT. Meso-level theory of accountability in organizations. RESEARCH IN PERSONNEL AND HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT 2008. [DOI: 10.1016/s0742-7301(08)27005-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/11/2023]
|